People v. McDaniels, 91CA1947
| Decision Date | 30 July 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 91CA1947,91CA1947 |
| Citation | 844 P.2d 1257 |
| Parties | The PEOPLE of the State of Colorado, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Richard McDANIELS, Defendant-Appellant. . I |
| Court | Colorado Court of Appeals |
Gale A. Norton, Atty. Gen., Raymond T. Slaughter, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., Timothy M. Tymkovich, Sol. Gen., Wendy J. Ritz, Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for plaintiff-appellee.
David F. Vela, Colorado State Public Defender, David M. Furman, Deputy State Public Defender, Denver, for defendant-appellant.
Opinion by Judge NEY.
Defendant, Richard McDaniels, appeals from the sentence imposed following his conviction for menacing and revocation of his probation. We affirm.
Defendant contends the trial court erred by not imposing a sentence consistent with the terms of the original plea agreement following revocation of probation. We disagree.
Defendant entered a plea of guilty to the charge of felony menacing upon the condition that if sentenced to incarceration, his sentence would not exceed two years. The trial court sentenced the defendant to four years probation.
Defendant's probation was subsequently revoked, and the trial court sentenced the defendant to a three-year term of incarceration. The trial court indicated at the revocation hearing that it would reconsider the sentence upon verification that the original plea bargain contemplated a two-year sentencing cap even if probation were revoked. Otherwise, the trial court ruled that the agreement for a two-year cap was extinguished following the granting of probation at the original sentencing hearing. The record reveals that the original sentencing judge made no reference to the cap applying if probation were revoked.
If probation is revoked, the trial court may impose any sentence or grant any probation "which might originally have been imposed or granted." Section 16-11-206(5), C.R.S. (1986 Repl.Vol. 8A); Crim.P. 32(f)(5).
Defendant contends that because the plea bargain placed a cap of two years incarceration he would not have been sentenced to a longer term "originally." Therefore, he argues that § 16-11-206(5) limits this sentence to the original two-year cap. We disagree.
We interpret the reference in § 16-11-206(5) to the sentence which may originally have been imposed as concerning the statutory limits of the sentence unaffected by any plea bargain. Thus, that statute does not prohibit the sentence here imposed. To adopt defendant's construction of § 16-11-206(5) would eliminate the option of subsequent incarceration whenever the original plea agreement contemplated granting probation, despite a defendant's failure to comply with the terms and conditions of probation.
We also conclude the trial court did not err by imposing a sentence of three years incarceration following the revocation of defendant's probation.
Here, the defendant received the benefit of his plea agreement at the time of the initial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Beecroft v. People
...A sentence of probation is not a form of imprisonment. See People v. Flenniken, 749 P.2d 395, 399 (Colo.1988); People v. McDaniels, 844 P.2d 1257, 1258-59 (Colo.App.1992). Therefore, if probation is revoked, the time served on probation need not be credited against the new sentence. See Geh......
-
People v. Villela
...imposed," regardless of any sentencing concession in the original plea agreement. § 16-11-206(5), C.R.S. 2018; People v. McDaniels , 844 P.2d 1257, 1258 (Colo. App. 1992) ( section 16-11-206(5) permits any sentence "which may originally have been imposed as concerning the statutory limits o......
-
People v. Smith
...any sentence or grant any probation ... which might originally have been imposed or granted." See Crim. P. 32(f)(5); People v. McDaniels, 844 P.2d 1257, 1258 (Colo.App.1992). Hence, the trial court may impose a sentence greater than the applicable presumptive range if, based upon the eviden......
-
People v. Castellano
...Id. at 499. The division then concluded that, based on the probation statute and reasoning from the opinion in People v. McDaniels, 844 P.2d 1257 (Colo.App.1992), the sentencing court also had the authority to impose a longer prison sentence after revocation of the defendant's probation. Se......
-
Chapter 8 - § 8.2 • MODIFICATION AND REVOCATION PROCEEDINGS
...has been violated, the court is free to impose a jail sentence despite an initial stipulation to probation, People v. McDaniels, 844 P.2d 1257, 1258 (Colo. App. 1992), or any other limitation placed on the sentence when the plea was entered. Conversely, the court may resentence the defendan......